The truth is the President is a liar

.

Aug. 18 editorial by Doug Patton:  Obama Unaccustomed to Having His Lies Challenged

Obama has been preachin’ gov’t takeover of healthcare since at least 2003: he promotes it over and over in this video, and Barney Frank concurs, IN THEIR OWN WORDS.  Then Obama turns around these days and tries to claim he does not support universal healthcare, i.e., single payer!

The Heritage Foundation won’t say it, but I will.  Obama is a liar.  His ‘town hall’ meeting in New Hampshire yesterday was another Hollywood production.   Heritage documents at least seven lies Obama told adoring fans yesterday:

OBAMACARE PEP RALLY FACT CHECK  8.12.09

“I have not said that I was a single-payer supporter.”  (*)  This is directly contradicted by candidate Barack Obama’s own website which quotes Obama at a rally in Ames, Iowa form 2008: “If I were designing a system from scratch I would probably set up a single-payer system. … So what I believe is we should set up a series of choices….Over time it may be that we end up transitioning to such a system.” So there you have in one paragraph the true purpose of Obama’s public option: a vehicle to slowly transition all Americans out of private coverage and into a government-run single payer health care system. This Trojan Horse view of the public option has been reaffirmed by Reps. Barney Frank (D-MA), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Washington Post blogger Ezra Klein, and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.

“Under the reform we’re proposing, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” This statement is also plainly false. Again, as demonstrated above, the true purpose of Obama’s public option is to move Americans out of their private coverage and into government run health care. Independent, non-partisan analysis from the Lewin Group has confirmed the House bill, H.R. 3200, will do exactly that: About 88.1 million workers would see their current private, employer-sponsored health plan go away and would be shifted to the public plan.

“That’s what the health exchange is all about, is that you — just like a member of Congress — can go and choose the plan that’s right for you.” This statement isn’t false, but it is misleading. Members of Congress do purchase their health care through a health exchange: the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). Through the FEHBP 283 private plans compete for federal employees’ health care dollars. The Heritage Foundation has long been a supporter of health reform that empowers consumers to utilize a FEHBP like system. But Obamacare is nothing like the FEHBP system. There is no government run public option competing with private plans in the FEHBP. So whenever Obama says that a health exchange already “drives down costs” he is right … but remember that this cost reduction is achieved purely by private health coverage without any “competition” from a government run public option.

“We have the AARP on board because they know this is a good deal for our seniors.”
This is just plain false. The AARP released a statement late yesterday directly contradicting the President: “While the President was correct that AARP will not endorse a health care reform bill that would reduce Medicare benefits, indications that we have endorsed any of the major health care reform bills currently under consideration in Congress are inaccurate.”

“I just want to be clear, again: Seniors who are listening here, this does not affect your benefits. This is not money going to you to pay for your benefits; this is money that is subsidizing folks who don’t need it.” Under the current system, more and more seniors are discovering that it is becoming harder and harder to find and keep doctors who will accept Medicare patients. A 2008 survey found that 29% of the Medicare beneficiaries it surveyed who were looking for a primary care doctor had a problem finding one to treat them. Obamacare will only make this problem worse by cutting $313 billion in Medicare reimbursements to health care providers over the next 10 years. This will only force more doctors to stop seeing Medicare patients. Obama also mentioned yesterday that he wants to pay for subsidized health care by killing the Medicare Advantage program. Medicare Advantage plans cover all of the traditional Medicare benefits and much more, including coor­dinated care and care-management programs for enrollees with chronic conditions as well as additional hospitalization and skilled nursing facility stays. 22% of all Medicare patients, which translates to 10.5 million seniors, are currently enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans.

“I said I won’t sign a bill that adds to the deficit or the national debt. Okay? So this will have to be paid for.” That is a nice promise, but so was Obama’s October 2008 promise that he would enact a “net spending cut.” We all know how that has turned out. The reality is that the Senate still has not figured out how to pay for their bill and the House bill would increase the budget deficit by $239 billion over the next ten years. CBO director Doug Elmendorf has said: “In sum, relative to current law, the proposal would probably generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits during the decade beyond the current 10-year budget window.”

“My belief is, is that [Obamacare] should not burden people who make $250,000 a year or less.” Both the House and Senate bills partially pay for Obamacare by imposing “employer mandates” or “pay or play” provisions that require employers to pay higher taxes if (a) they do not offer health insurance, or (b) they offer it but have employees who decline it and instead use the government system. Multiple studies have shown that such provisions cause both lower wages and lost jobs for low-income workers.

And these are just some of the falsehoods and misinformation peddled by President Obama yesterday. It doesn’t even include his choice to sell Obamacare as The “Post Office” of Health Care Plans. No wonder so many Americans are skeptical.

__________

WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL THAT TRANSPARENT CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN?

Washington Post report re: Obama’s secret deals

__________

WSJ says Obama touts single payer (*)

4 Responses to The truth is the President is a liar

  1. Denise says:

    Obama has said he would like a single-payer system if he were starting from scratch. So I think somebody else is lying or misrepresenting the facts on this issue.

    You’ll be forced to change doctors… is a interesting argument that anyone with insurance should understand is a non-issue. Under our current system, if your employer changes health insurers to save money, your doctor might not be in the new plan’s network – and you’ll have to change doctors! And why shouldn’t employers have the choice of a less expensive health insurance plan? One that doesn’t spend huge amounts of money on multimillion dollar CEO salaries and prizes for sales agents that are usually all-expenses-paid trips to lovely resorts?

    And Medicare Advantage plans are appealing to many seniors because they are getting more money from Medicare than is spent on the average beneficiary who remains with Original Medicare. Why should the Medicare Advantage enrollees get more benefits than other Medicare beneficiaries? And isn’t this wasteful? How can fiscally conservative people support this increase in Medicare spending that includes “free gym memberships” for Medicare Advantage enrollees?

    And AARP has clarified that it supports health insurance and health care reform – but not any one bill at this point.

    And the Lewin Group is owned by UnitedHealth Group, one of the biggest and baddest insurance companies (with $857 million in profits April-June of this year).

    I’m an insurance agent and I see all sides of this issue – but I really dislike misrepresentations on both sides. In my opinion the groups that are against change have gone way over the line with “death panels” and “kill grandma”, “forced to change doctors” and “socialism”.

    • Tom Thacker says:

      apparently you’ve never looked up the word so I did for you
      so⋅cial⋅ism  /ˈsoʊʃəˌlɪzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [soh-shuh-liz-uhm] Show IPA
      Use socialism in a Sentence
      –noun 1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
      It will all happen in phases just as it did in most other countries. It’s not like we will have euthenasia next year, or even 5 years from now but it is a slippery slope that has been repeated around the world

  2. Obama Explains How His Health Care Plan Will ‘Eliminate’ Private Insurance
    http://www.breitbart.tv/uncovered-video-obama-explains-how-his-health-care-plan-will-eliminate-private-insurance/

    You don’t believe the Kevorkian Clause exists?
    http://allanerickson.wordpress.com/2009/08/12/shut-up-and-trust-the-government/

    Read HR 3200 and weep when it comes to rationing, choice of doctor, health commissions and so on.
    http://www.liberty.edu/media/9980/attachments/healthcare_overview_obama_072909.pdf

  3. Bill Hemingway says:

    Apparently Denise hasn’t really had a lot of experience with medicare advantage. My mother-in-law (age 92) recently broke her ankle. She has medicare advantage, so the way it was advertised it appeared that it would be better than straight medicare. Well, we have been sorely disappointed. We have had to fight for every bit of care she has received, using the appeal and grievance system to get most every procedure and service. She is currently in an assisted living facility that we are paying for because the provider would not allow her to stay in the skilled nursing facility she needed. So, if our mother-in-law is getting “more” than if she had just plain medicare, there is something really wrong here. We should also note that she pays more out of pocket for medicare advantage than for a supplement.

    Further, Denise needs to wake up and realize that the language of this bill doesn’t always exactly say what is clearly implied or potentially possible. This is not a mistake. Allan and others are distilling the weasel wording into plain English and exposing the stealthiness. The wording is designed to keep the door cracked for future incursion.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: